An anti-gun story by J. Portner, an assistant editor at Education Week,
recently appeared in the Washington Post under the title, "Loopholes
Allow Guns in Schools".

The well known federal law against bringing guns within 1,000 feet of
schools does not apply to police officers, citizens with a license to
carry a concealed weapon, or in some cases, to school employees. Although
the author could not cite any cases where this had resulted in a death
or injury, the premise was that this violates the spirit of the law and
is somehow wrong.

Like many other alarmist articles on guns and schools, the obligatory
reference to Columbine was used to heighten the sense of panic in the
reader, despite the fact that the Columbine example tells us nothing about
the behavior of armed adults. The article is short on logic, but provides
a good example of the visceral fear of guns and distrust of gun owners
that is deeply felt by many writers in the elite media.

In spite of the fact that mass murders are very rare, Americans have
been force fed innumerable images of these terrible crimes. Each media
feeding frenzy includes a call for more laws. But do laws prohibiting
guns in certain places really prevent Columbine-type tragedies? In a word,
no.

A striking paradox is associated with these mass murders. They are much
more likely to occur in areas that have been designated as gun free zones.
Post Offices were the first buildings associated by the media with mass
shootings, in this case by disgruntled workers who were said to "go
postal". The fact that guns were prohibited in Post Offices was well
publicized.

Office buildings, hospitals, convenience stores, TV studios, chain restaurants
and day care centers have all been targets of crazed killers intent on
running up a large score of victims before they finally kill themselves.
All of these enterprises prevent employees from arming themselves, even
if they have a state-issued license granting them that right.

Schools became popular targets for young mass murderers in the mid 1990s,
around the time that the Gun Free School Zones act of 1994 was enacted.
This law and similar local laws were targeted at gang related violence,
but had the unfortunate consequence of making schools a more attractive
target for disturbed teens who wanted to end their own lives with a dramatic
killing spree.

In 1999, John Lott and William Landes published an extensive statistical
study of multiple shooting incidents. They showed that mass shootings
occur less often in areas where responsible citizens are allowed permits
to carry weapons discretely.

Have you ever heard of a mass shooting in a police station, at a pistol
range, or at a gun show? Suicidal mass murderers may be insane, but they
are not necessarily stupid. They always select a soft target for their
final acts of violence. This principle also applies to many other types
of crime.

Some corporate managers are aware of this situation and resist pressure
to put up the "no guns allowed" sign. Even if company policy
prevents employees from being armed, it is a mistake to publicize that
fact.

This is not a new concept. A classic case occurred in the late 1970's
in the Washington D.C. area. A pizza delivery driver was fired after he
drove off a robber with his handgun. After this was publicized, the area
manager made the mistake of announcing on television that the drivers
were all unarmed. The company was then plagued by a wave of robberies
until the policy was changed, at which time robberies dropped dramatically.

The emotional reaction of the gun haters after a mass shooting is that
we must further tighten the gun laws. Even if this response makes some
people feel good, reality tells us that it isn't the best answer.

Expecting a deranged, suicidal individual to honor a law prohibiting
guns is sheer utopian fantasy. Creating and publicizing a gun free zone
will, in fact, increase the chances of the kind of tragedy we seek to
prevent.

How many of us, no matter how much we hate guns, would be willing to
put a sign stating, "We have no guns here", on our home? Common
sense tells us that this is an invitation to criminals. This same simple
concept applies to schools and other public places.

Some people will always have an unreasonable fear of weapons and a desire
to impose their will on society. We must not let their phobia cloud our
thinking. Exploiting our school children and putting them at risk to promote
a misguided political agenda is criminally negligent.